Integrating Biophilic Environmental Design and Fourth Industrial Revolution Technologies for Sustainable Economic Development: A Systematic Review of Residential Architecture

The residential building sector is a critical driver of global sustainability due to its substantial resource consumption, energy demand, impact on human wellbeing, and economic productivity. Biophilic environmental design, which reconnects occupants with natural systems, has been shown to improve indoor environmental quality (IEQ), psychological well-being, and energy performance. Conversely, smart sensors, artificial intelligence (AI), Internet of Things (IoT), and data-driven building management, which are systems of Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) technologies, can optimise operational efficiency and adaptive building performance. Despite their individual merits, the integration of biophilic design with 4IR technologies remains underexplored, while the evidence on their combined environmental and economic outcomes has remained fragmented. A systematic review methodology, as guided by PRISMA, was adopted to coalesce empirical and theoretical evidence published between 2010 and 2025. Relevant peer-reviewed journals, conference papers, and grey literature were retrieved from Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect using thematic concepts such as “biophilic design,” “4IR technologies,” “smart residential buildings,” and “sustainability.” Inclusion criteria focused on studies that reported environmental and economic outcomes related to residential architecture. Seventy-seven studies that met the inclusion criteria were examined using a Structured Data Extraction Matrix (SDEM). Findings indicate that biophilic/4IR-integrated residential buildings enhance IEQ, thermal comfort, and occupant wellbeing, while optimising energy efficiency, reducing operational costs, and lowering carbon emissions. Comparative and thematic analyses show that these buildings outperform conventional designs in environmental and economic performance and occupant satisfaction. The study recommends that architects, developers, and policymakers focus on integrating biophilic principles with 4IR technologies to achieve sustainable, human-centred residential design. Further empirical research is needed to assess the long-term economic impacts, cost-effectiveness, and policy integration of place-based and data-driven sustainable residential development.

Biophilic Environmental Design, Fourth Industrial Revolution, PRISMA, Residential Architecture, Structured Data Extraction Matrix.

1. Abdullah, D. (2024). Integrating biophilic design in smart urban infrastructure for environmental and public health outcomes. Journal of Smart Infrastructure and Environmental Sustainability, 14-22. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Abimbola, A., & Fullah, H. (2025, February 21). Biophilic Design Strategies and Indoor Environmental Quality: A Case Study. Retrieved from MDPI: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/5/1816?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Adrian, T., Kokou, Y., & Christophe, N. (2024, July 12). Smart Buildings: A Comprehensive Systematic Literature Review on Data-Driven Building Management Systems. Retrieved from ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382088131_Smart_Buildings_A_Comprehensive_Systematic_Literature_Review_on_Data-Driven_Building_Management_Systems?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Al Horr, Y., Arif, M., Katafygiotou, M., Mazroei, A., Kaushik, A., & Elsarrag, E. (2016). Impact of indoor environmental quality on occupant well-being and comfort: A review of the literature. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 1-11. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Al Sayyed, H. (2025). Investigating the role of biophilic design to enhance comfort in residential spaces: Human physiological response in immersive virtual environment. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 6, Article 1411425. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Anderson, J. E. (2015). Energy analysis of the built environment — A review and outlook. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 149-158. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Arku, G. (2010). The housing and economic development debate revisited: economic significance of housing in developing countries. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 377-395. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Asojo, A., & Hazazi, F. (2025). Biophilic Design Strategies and Indoor Environmental Quality: A Case Study. Sustainability, 17(5), 1816. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Chinedu, C. O., Amin, A. H., & Emmanuel, M. (2025). A Review of Energy Efficiency Strategies in Smart Buildings: Integrating Occupant Comfort, HVAC Optimisation, and Building Automation. Research and Reviews in Sustainability, 48-60. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Chinwe, E., Ojima, Z. W., Aanuoluwapo, C. D.-O., Jonathan, L., Deborah, T. E., James, I., & David, B. O. (2025). AI-driven transformations in smart buildings: A review of energy efficiency and sustainable operations. Digital Engineering, 1-11. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Das, D. (2025). Integrating IoT and AI for Sustainable Energy Efficient Buildings: A Case Study. Sustainability, 17(22), 10313. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Ding, X., Cui, Y., Chen, Z., & Zhang, H. (2024). Energy Efficiency in Biophilic Architecture: A Systematic Literature Review and Visual Analysis Using CiteSpace and VOSviewer. Buildings, 14(12), 3800. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Fatema, E. H., Hassan, N. N., Ola, S., & Khaled, C. (2025, July 8). Machine Learning in Smart Buildings: A Review of Methods, Challenges, and Future Trends. Retrieved from MDPI: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/14/7682?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Gaekwad, J. S., Sal, M. A., Roös, P. B., & Walker, A. (2022). A Meta Analysis of Emotional Evidence for the Biophilia Hypothesis and Implications for Biophilic Design. Frontiers in Psychology, 1-19. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Ghaffarianhoseini, A., Ghaffarianhoseini, V., Naismith, S., Tookey, R., & Azhar, C. (2019). Internet of Things (IoT) applications for building performance monitoring: A systematic review. Energy and Buildings, 109357. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Ghaziani, R. (2021, November 5). Biophilic design patterns for primary schools: Connecting built environments with nature. Retrieved from MDPI: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/12207?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Hana, B., & Mario, G. (2021, August 3). A Systematic Review of Construction 4.0 in the Context of the BIM 4.0 Premise. Retrieved from Buildings: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/11/8/337?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Hansong, X., Wei, Y., David, G., & Nada, G. (2022, May 6). A Survey on Industrial Internet of Things: A Cyber-Physical Systems Perspective. Retrieved from IEEE: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9074819/?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Ibrahim, T., & Seyed, M. S. (2024, May 11). Climate Change and the Built Environment — A Systematic Review. Retrieved from Springer Nature Link: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10668-024-04962-2?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Ismail, M. A. (2021). Activating biophilic design patterns as a sustainable landscape approach. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science , 1-16. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Jie, Y., Haoyue, Z., & Jing, Y. (2024, September 5). Health Impacts of Biophilic Design from a Multisensory Interaction Perspective: Empirical Evidence, Research Designs, and Future Directions. Retrieved from MDPI: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/9/1448?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Khan, M., & Alsabban, A. (2023). Industry 4.0 Enabled Digital Transformation: Prospects, Instruments, Challenges, and Implications for Business Strategies. Sustainability, 15(11), 8553. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Mahmoud, E., Minh Quang, T., Karar, M., Matti, L., & Mohamed, M. F. (2021). Deep learning based Industry 4.0 and Internet of Things towards effective energy management for smart buildings. Sensors, 21(4), 1038. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Matthew, C. (2017). A Systematic Review of Urban Sustainability Assessment Literature. Sustainability, 9(11), 2048. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Matthew, J. P., David, M., Patrick, M. B., Isabelle, B., Tammy, C. H., Cynthia, D. M., . . . Joanne, E. M. (2021, March 29). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. Retrieved from PubMed Central: PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Melissa, L. R., Shona, K., Siw, W., Ana, P. A., David, M., Matthew, J. P., & Jonathan, B. K. (2021, January 26). PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews. Retrieved from Springer Nature Link: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Morano, P., Salvia, R., S., C., A., C., L., C., & R., C. (2021, April 23). A Systematic Review of Sustainable Urban Project Literature. Retrieved from MDPI: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/4782?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Mukilan, P., Balasubramanian, M., Narayanamoorthi, R., Mohammad, S., & Yasser, A. (2024, October 29). IoT — A promising solution to energy management in smart buildings: A systematic review, applications, barriers, and future scope. Retrieved from MDPI: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/14/11/3446?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Nitu, M. A., Gocer, O., Wijesooriya, N., Vijapur, D., & Candido, C. (2022). A Biophilic Design Approach for Improved Energy Performance in Retrofitting Residential Projects. Sustainability, 14(7), 3776. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Olabode, E. O., Temitope, E., Willy, S., Temitope, O., & Mercy, O. (2023). Establishing the Limitations of Sustainable Construction in Developing Countries. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 609-624. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Opeyemi, T., Tajudeen,  ., & Tope,  . (2025, April 5). Advancing Sustainability in Nigerian Architecture: A Systematic Review of Sustainable Materials, Circular Economy, and Low-Carbon Solutions. Retrieved from International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science (IJRIAS): https://rsisinternational.org/journals/ijrias/articles/advancing-sustainability-in-nigerian-architecture-a-systematic-review-of-sustainable-materials-circular-economy-and-low-carbon-solutions/?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Perini, K., Rosasco, P., & Mancini, M. (2025). Unique Case Studies on Biophilic Green Roofs and Systems. Buildings, 234-249. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Puji, C. S., Rosida, N. A., Riki, R. A., & Arief, R. (2024). Smart Home Energy Management Systems: A Systematic Review. Journal of System and Management Sciences, 129-146. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Qayyum, F., Jamil, H., & Ali, F. (2024). A Review of Smart Energy Management in Residential Buildings for Smart Cities. Energies, 83-101. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Qi, Z., Zuraini, M. A., & Nurdiyana, Z. A. (2025). Sustainable Adaptive Reuse of Historic Buildings: Development of a Framework from Systematic Review. npj Heritage Science, 1-14. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Raja, N. S., Noramirah, N. S., Fitriyah, R., & Hariati, A. H. (2025). Circular Economy in Property Management: PRISMA Systematic Review. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), 4730-4750. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Sara, A., Kunjoon, B., Paige, P., Nicholas, C., Carolina, C., Linhao, L., . . . Brent, B. (2021). Biophilic office design: Exploring the impact of a multisensory approach on human well-being. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1-15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Sascha, J. O., Max, J., Michael, L., Stefan, M., Marion, M., Birgit, V.-H., & Kathrin, M. M. (2022). Cyber-Physical Systems in the Context of Industry 4.0: A Review, Categorization, and Outlook. Information Systems Frontiers, 1731–1772. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Seto, K. C., Güneralp, B., & Hutyra, L. R. (2012). Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (pp. 16083–16088). Washington, D.C., USA: PNAS. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Söderlund, J., & Newman, P. (2015). Biophilic architecture: a review of the rationale and outcomes. AIMS Environmental Science. AIMS Environmental Science, 950-969. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Tarek, S., & Ouf, A. (2021, December 5). Biophilic smart cities: the role of nature and technology in enhancing urban resilience. Retrieved from PubMed Central: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8643284/?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Tekin, B., & Montelli, R. (2025, July 16). Biophilic design in the built environment: Trends, gaps and future directions. Retrieved from MDPI: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/15/14/2516?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Vanessa, W., & Melinda, K. (2023, November 20). The Biophilia Reactivity Hypothesis: biophilia as a temperament trait, or more precisely, a domain specific attraction to biodiversity. Retrieved from Springer Nature Link: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10818-023-09342-w?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. William, B., Catherine, R., & Joseph, C. (2014). 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design. New York: Terrapin Bright Green. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Wu, W., & Skye, H. M. (2021). Residential Net-Zero Energy Buildings: Review and Perspective. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 142, 110859. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Yaolin, L., Ling, X., Wei, Y., Lin, T., & Melissa, C. (2025, May 8). A Systematic Review on the Research and Development of Adaptive Buildings. Retrieved from MDPI: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/15/10/1593?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Yu, G., Erzsébet, S. Z., & Gyergyák, J. (2023, August 7). Healthy Dwelling: The Perspective of Biophilic Design in the Design of the Living Space. Retrieved from MDPI: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/13/8/2020?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Yupeng, F., & Chuanglin, F. (2023, February 7). GHG emissions and energy consumption of residential buildings-a systematic review and meta-analysis. Retrieved from National Library Of Medicine: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37358677/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Zainab, M. A., & Doğa, Ü. (2025). Integrating biophilic design and smart technologies for sustainable urban development in Muscat, Oman – advancing SDG 11: sustainable cities and communities. Journal of Lifestyle and SDGs Review, 1-19. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Zhong, W., Schröder, T., & Bekkering, J. (2021). Biophilic design in architecture and its contributions to health, well being, and sustainability: A critical review. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 599-614. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Zulnoorain, K., Mohammad, F. A., Umair, A., Sabeeha, H., & Mohd, A. A. (2025). Biophilic Design and Its Implications for Human Health and Well Being. African Journal of Biomedical Research, 1253–1265. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Methane Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste - Case Study in Cai Rang District, Can Tho City, Vietnam
• Youth Activism, Intentional Integration of Policies to Raise Awareness on Climate Change Action among the Youth
• Breathing Spaces: Environmental & User Experience in Dhanmondi and Zigatola Multistoried Apartments, Dhaka, Bangladesh
• Effects of Solid Waste Disposal on Soil Quality in Makurdi Metropolis, Benue State, Nigeria
• Environmental Impact of Artisanal and Small-Scale Gold Mining in Borgu Local Government Area